What IS space?
The final frontier.
But seriously folks...
Depending on which theory you subscribe to, space is: the underlying geometric foundation of the universe; a dimensional component of spacetime; quantum foam; vacuum zero-point energy; or any of several other insteresting postulates.
That's a lot of "stuff" for "nothing".
Then nothing I said was false. Absolute zero is an artificial construct. Space is nothing.
Absolute zero is a mathematically asymptotic energy state, much like the speed of light is a mathematically asymptotic velocity for mass. You can get as close as you like to it, but you can't actually get there. Eventually you get to a point where the remaining zero-point energy of the system is below the Plank Limit, and if it's even possible to manipulate energy beyond that limit, you can't measure the effect you're having, if any.
You believe in the fairytale of dark matter? How is that different than the fairytale of God?
Dark matter differs from stories of God in that the theory of dark matter is falsifiable. A wealth of observational evidence supports the concept (cosmic microwave background radiation; baryonic acoustical oscillation; gravitational lensing; COBE and WMAP imaging; and several others). Unlike God, the dark matter proposal is also falsifiable
, and a number of direct-detection experiments have been proposed, and several are currently underway (SNOLAB; Canfranc; Gran Sasso; DUSEL; Boulby). Additionally, mathematical models of candidates for dark matter particles are being empirically tested at the Large Hadron Collider.
There are all kinds of theories but no proof.
The only proof you will see in science is negative proof -- proof that a proposed theory is wrong. What you will see in support of theories is evidence, and for the best theories, a great deal of evidence.
Math is a language. Language can be falsified or used for lying...or obscuring the truth.
I'm not sure I'd call math a "language". It's a formal symbolic system. Language is pretty much an informal system, anthough for purposes of analysis you can formalize parts of it.
And in math you can
have positive proofs, which makes the suggestion that math could be "falsified" somewhat problematic. A mathematical proposition is either proven or unproven. If it is unproven, you can establish whether it is in fact provable within a given formal system, even though you may not have yet arrived at the proof.
It seems to me that what you're really thinking of is the application
of math to real world problems. Plenty of things are provable in mathematics that, as far as we know right now, are completely abstract. When it comes to mapping real world events mathematically, or finding mathematical correspondences in the real world, that
is where interpretation comes in, and yes, misinterpretation is possible.